Transcript Slides

Fast Sparse Matrix-Vector
Multiplication on GPUs: Implications
for Graph Mining
Xintian Yang, Srinivasan Parthasarathy and P. Sadayappan
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
The Ohio State University
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Outline
• Motivation and Background
• Single- and Multi- GPU SpMV Optimizations
• Automatic Parameter Tuning and Performance
Modeling
• Conclusions
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Introduction
• Sparse Matrix-Vector Multiplication (SpMV)
– y = Ax, where A is a sparse matrix and x is a dense vector.
– Dominant cost when solving large-scale linear systems or
eigenvalue problems in iterative methods.
• Focus of much research
– Scientific Applications, e.g. finite element method
– Graph Mining algorithms
• PageRank, Random Walk with Restart, HITS
– Industrial Strength Efforts
• CPUs, Clusters (e.g. Vuduc, Yelick et al 2009)
• GPUs (e.g. NVIDIA 2010)
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Why GPUs?
• High Performance
– GPU is 10x faster
• High Memory Bandwidth
– 180 GB/s v.s. <40 GB/s
• High Productivity
GB/s
GFLOPS
– CUDA (now) vs.
OpenGL (before)
[ Source: www-sop.inria.fr/nachos ]
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Problem Statement and Challenges
• Can we improve upon industrial strength efforts for computing
SpMV on matrices representing large power-law graphs on
GPU?
– Does it yield end-to-end improvements in graph mining
application (e.g. PageRank) ?
• Challenges
Degree
– Need to balance load
• Power-law nature of graphs
– Need to coalesce memory access
– Need to avoid conditional divergence
• SIMD architecture prefers the threads follow
identical control flow in branching instructions.
– Need to handle large matrices
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Graph Nodes
[ Source: Wikipedia ]
Background: CUDA Architecture
• Programming Model
(logical hierarchy):
–
–
–
–
Grid
Block
Thread
Kernel
[ Source: NVIDIA CUDA guide ]
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Background: CUDA Architecture
• Hardware (Physical):
– A set of multiprocessors
– A warp = 32 threads, concurrently
run the same instructions
– Conditional divergence
• Parallel threads should follow
identical control flow to avoid
performance penalty.
• Memory System
– Global memory: coalescing
– Texture cache
• 6~8KB texture cache per
multiprocessor
[ Source: NVIDIA CUDA guide ]
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Outline
• Motivation and Background
• Single- and Multi- GPU SpMV Optimizations
• Automatic Parameter Tuning and Performance
Modeling
• Conclusions
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Single GPU Optimizations I
• Problem I: Row accesses random values in vector x -- bad locality.
• Solution: Tiling matrix A and vector x by texture cache.
Texture cache size was not available
Estimated to be 250 KB (=64,000 columns)
Note entire X cannot fit on texture cache
• Problem II: Full tiling is not always beneficial (power-law)
• Solution: Partially tiling (parameterized), reorder by column length.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Single GPU Optimizations II
• Problem III: Imbalance in Row Length
• Solution: Composite Storage
– Row major performs well on long rows (1 warp per row).
– Column major performs well on short rows (1 thread per row).
– Partition rows into workload with similar size, padded with 0.
• Workload with long rows will be stored in row major.
• Workload with many short rows will be stored in column major.
– Workload size: parameterized
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Empirical Results on NVIDIA Tesla GPU
• Power-law matrices
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Results: PageRank
CPU: Vuduc, Yelick et al 2009
GPU: NVIDIA 2010
up to 16.5X over CPU
GPU: Tile-Composite
up to 30X over CPU
up to 2X over NVIDIA GPU
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Multi-GPU SpMV
• Problem IV: Handling Large Matrices
• Challenge: PCI-express bandwidth limitation(max 8GB/s)
• Solution: Processing on Multiple GPUs
– Partition the matrix by rows
and distribute the work to
different GPUs in a cluster.
– SK2005 dataset:
• 50 million nodes
• 2 billion edges
• 75% parallel efficiency
• Improvement over NVIDIA – 1.5X
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Outline
• Motivation and Background
• Single- and Multi- GPU SpMV Optimizations
• Automatic Parameter Tuning and Performance
Modeling
• Conclusions
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Automatic Parameter Tuning
• Two parameters in our approach
1. Number of tiles: when to stop partially tiling?
1. Workload size in a tile: how to partition a tile?
Stop when no memory
reuse benefits!
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Automatic Parameter Tuning
• Performance Modeling
Streaming Multiprocessor
Warp 0 1x64
Warp 1 2x32
6 GFLOPS
4 GFLOPS
Warp 2
32x2
Warp 3 64x1
3 GFLOPS
1 GFLOPS
– Offline component: map a workload to a performance
number
• Parameter search space pruning
• Dataset independent and one time cost per hardware
– Online component: given all the workloads of a matrix tile,
take the average performance as predicted performance
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Automatic Parameter Tuning
• Results
• Performance model can also be used to predict
performance.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Outline
• Motivation and Background
• Single- and Multi- GPU SpMV Optimizations
• Automatic Parameter Tuning and Performance
Modeling
• Conclusions
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Take Home Messages
• Architecture conscious SpMV optimizations for graph
mining kernels (e.g. PageRank, RWR, HITS) on GPU
– Highlight I: Orders of magnitude improvement over best
CPU implementations.
– Highlight II: 2X improvement over industrial strength
implementations from NVIDIA and others
• PCI-express bandwidth limiting factor for processing
large graphs
– Multiple GPUs can handle large web graph data.
• Auto-tuning leads to non-parametric solution!
– Also enables accurate performance modeling.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
• Acknowledgment: grants from NSF
–
–
–
–
CAREER-IIS-034-7662
RI-CNS-0403342
CCF-0702587
IIS-0917070
• Thank you for your attention!
• Questions?
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Backup slides
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
SpMV Kernel
• Unstructured matrices: non-power-law
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Performance Prediction
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Dataset
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Hardware Details
• CPU: AMD Opteron X2 with 8GB RAM
• GPU: NVIDIA Tesla C1060 with 30
multiprocessors, 240 cores and 4GB global memory
• MPI-based cluster with 1 CPU and 2 GPUs per
node.
• CUDA version 3.0
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Sorting Cost
• Sorting is used to re-structure the columns and
rows of the matrix.
• When the row or column lengths follow power-law
distribution, they can be sorted very efficiently
– The numbers in the long tail of the power-law
distribution can be sorted using bucket sort in linear
time.
– We only need to sort the remaining numbers.
• Further more, these cost can be amortized by the
iterative call to the SpMV kernel.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Parameter search space pruning for
workload size
• Lower bound: the longest row in a tile
– It cannot be partitioned.
• Upper bound: total number of non-zeros in a tile
divided by the maximum number of available
warps (960 on the Tesla GPU)
– We want to fully utilize the available resource.
• Workload size must be an integer multiple of the
longest row
– The first workload must be a rectangle.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Data Mining Applications
• Given directed graph G = (V, E) , and adjacency matrix A
• PageRank:
– W is row normalization of A
– c = 0.85, U is a n by n matrix with all elements set to 1/n.
• Random Walk with Restart (RWR): given a query node
i, compute the relevance score from all other nodes to
node i.
– W is column normalization of A
– c = 0.9, the ith element in
is 1, the others are all 0.
• HITS: each web page is assigned an authority score and
a hub score.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
PageRank
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Random Walk with Restart
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
HITS
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Limitations of Previous Work
• NVIDIA’s SpMV Library based on different
storage formats of matrix A.
– CSR
• CSR kernel
• CSR-vector kernel
• Optimized CSR-vector
Baskaran et al.
CSR: Imbalanced workload amongst threads, noncoalesced memory accesses.
CSR-vector: many short rows, waste of threads
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Limitation of Previous Work
– COO kernel
• Each warp works on one
interval
• Warps run in parallel
• With in one warp, threads do
binary reduction, need to
check whether two operands
are from the same row
warp0
warp1
COO: thread divergence, low thread level parallelism
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory
Limitation of Previous Work
– ELL kernel
• Requires row lengths are bounded by a small number k, 0s
are padded if a row is shorter than k.
• Data and index matrices are stored in column major, each
thread works on one row.
ELL: long rows can’t be bounded
– HYB kernel: ELL + COO
HYB: ELL part only covers small amount of computation,
COO part is slow, increasing the ratio of ELL part
introduces memory overhead.
Copyright 2011, Data Mining Research Laboratory